More child abuse reporting a false path

January 14, 2012

The fact that it comes as no surprise makes it no less disappointing: The horror of the Penn State child abuse scandal has prompted many people to call for a solution that is simple, obvious, and wrong: require more and more people to report any suspicion of child abuse. The Daily Press ("Bringing abuse to light," Dec.29) wants to force all of us in Virginia to be "mandated reporters." .

But that kind of phony solution only guarantees that more children will be hurt.

Most cases are far more ambiguous than a man allegedly caught in the act of raping a child in the shower. In fact, most don't involve "abuse" at all. Rather, they involve "neglect" — lack of adequate food, clothing, shelter or supervision. Often what's called "neglect" is simply poverty.

In Virginia all it takes to label someone a child abuser is for a caseworker to decide it is slightly more likely than not that maltreatment occurred. In spite of that incredibly low standard, more than 85 percent of reports are unfounded.

The real number of false reports almost certainly is higher. A major federal study found that caseworkers are two to six times more likely to wrongly substantiate a case than to wrongly label one unfounded.

That means overloaded caseworkers are spending at least 85 percent of their time spinning their wheels – and adding trauma to the lives of innocent families.

Expanding mandatory reporting means child abuse hotlines will be deluged with even more false reports, further overloading workers who then will have less time to find children in real danger.

At the same time, thousands more children who were never abused will be traumatized by the investigation itself – which can include a stripsearch looking for bruises. The medical exam required in cases of sexual abuse is even more traumatic.

To see the result of taking away all discretion and common sense, consider a recent case from Florida. An assistant principal, who is, of course, a mandated reporter, called in a report – and sheriff's deputies launched an investigation - when a schoolyard crush led a 12-year-old girl to kiss a 12-year-old boy. The mandated reporter said it was "a possible sex crime."

So it's no wonder that experts like Prof. David Finkelor of the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire – once a strong supporter of more mandatory reporting - told the Associated Press:

"Maybe it's better that people use discretion ... If everybody obeyed the letter of the law and reported a suspicion of abuse, the agencies would be completely overwhelmed with reports."

Indeed, this issue has produced rare consensus among child welfare experts who often disagree. When U.S. Senators favoring forcing everyone to report held a hearing on a bill to require it they could not find a single expert to testify in support of the idea.

The current hype and hysteria also risks setting off a foster-care panic – a sharp sudden surge in children removed from their homes by caseworkers who are running scared just like "mandatory reporters." While the vast majority of foster parents try to do the best they can for the children in their care, and some are true heroes, study after study has found abuse in one-quarter to one-third of foster homes. The record of group homes and institutions is worse. The accused in the Penn State cases, Jerry Sandusky, was a foster parent. His charity began as a group home.

Eighteen states already require everyone to report. There is no evidence children are safer in those states.

As is so often the case with our efforts to fight child abuse, this "solution" has nothing to do with helping children and everything to do with adult self-indulgence. It makes the adults feel better about a heinous crime, even as it actually increases the danger to children.

Wexler is executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform in Alexandria, http://www.nccpr.org NCCPR's position paper on mandatory reporting legislation is available at: http://bit.ly/s0EBF2